January 26, 2020, 04:54:08 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - TricksterHat

Pages: [1] 2
My 2 cents analysis:

1: It is a tough market for this kind of game under any circumstances.
2: MW is not a casual game, which limits the player base.
3: Whether AW cares about the players or not is irrelevant from a business point of view, as long as they donít scare away their customers.
4: Playing IRL might be better and more social (I certainly think so), but that is not an argument against online gaming in itself.
5: The player base is fickle. There are MANY good games, so if there are few or no opportunities to play a game, the players will move on to something else.

The question, I believe, is about community building from a business point of view. Community is not about having control over every individual player, but building spaces where your product will be used or promoted.

I agree that word-of-mouth is very important, but in order to get the word-of-mouth to happen, the game needs to be present in the mind of the potential ambassadors. It will not be present, if it is more than six months since you played a game (as a totally arbitrary rule of thumb).

That means that it is not important if some people play for free or if some people gets scared away because of a home-made program. The important thing question is, if MORE people gets scared away than people gaining or maintaining an interest, because every person who gains or maintains an interest in the game is both a potential customer and a potential ambassador.

I believe that the OCTGN platform is good for MW and AW, because every opportunity to play is good for players and every opportunity to promote the game is good for the company. A lot of big gaming companies are having huge problems because they are used to have total control over their product, but they are losing terrain to smaller companies that loosen the reins and let their customers be more involved in their product.

I donít think OCTGN is for everyone and I donít think it will guarantee AW success, but I think it slightly increases the chances of success.

Afterthought: There is a difference between the success of the game and the success of the company. The success of the game is measured in how much time people spend on the game, the success of the company is measured in income. There are probably various ways to make money on your product, but I think that in most cases the second is dependent on the first.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: 'Wizard's Castle' Turtling Strategy
« on: July 02, 2013, 01:52:03 PM »
As a BM or in general?

As BM: Rush before its setup? Cat-attack wih bobcats Cervere and Makuna maybe?

League / Tournament Play / Re: Tie Breaker conditions
« on: June 23, 2013, 06:17:58 PM »
Just discovered this thread. Inspired from some of the other suggestions, I would suggest:

The Gentleman Way: First option Ė if one is clearly in a stronger position or have played better, the other may give him/her the game. In a single/casual game players can agree to a tie. This can happen even before the time expires and is the equivalent of offering a draw in chess in chess.

Approximated calculation: The second option is trying to calculate which player is ahead. See below.

Lady Luck: If the two above fails, it is probably impossibly to say anything objective about who is ahead, therefore luck might as well decide. Each player rolls 5 dice, the highest wins. If tied, reroll.

Calculation table. For each player:
a)   Add remaining life, channeling, remaining mana/2 (rounded down) and subtract any upkeep not coming from opponents spells.
b)   Add the manacost of all the enchantments you control, subtract the removal cost for each negative condition on your mage and your creatures*.
c)   Add the manacost of each conjuration you control, subtract any damage.
d)   Add the manacost of each creature you control, subtract any damage.
e)   Add the manacost of all your equipment.

Compare a-e. The winner in each category gets 1 victory point (vp). If the difference > 5, the winner gets 2 vp, if the difference > 10, the winner gets 3 vp etc.

*in this step, add 2 points for each armor token from the Priestess crown of protection and subtract 2 points for each counter below three on the Forcemasters Forcefield.

The last option should hopefully never be used, but I think it is better to have this, than obvious bias in the calculation. And yes, I know this calculation isnít perfect.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: The best defense is a good offense
« on: June 20, 2013, 12:03:32 PM »

When you summon a mana crystal, use harmonize you get the mana increase so its ready to USE the turn after.
Big difference imo.

Did you mean spawnpoint? You can't use Harmonize on mana crystals right?

Well, this is my best attempt at a Priestess spawnpoint opening. I think it is doable, but I also suspect it can be shut down effectively, especially with early zone attacks.

T1: 20 mana, Temple of Asyra+Harmonize, 6m
T2: 16m+2 (on Temple), clericsx2, 8m
T3: 18m+2, Staff of Asyra+ some armor, 3m+4 (the clerics pray)
T4: 13m+6, Temple of Light+Gauntlets or Leather Boots or face-down enchantment, 1-2m (+8)
T5: 11/12m+10, Valshalla+attack, 0-1m

The clerics have prayed two times at the temple, making their effective cost 3. They should now be considered Blocks that happen to power Valshalla when they die. Opponent will still be ahead, but two daze-chances and Valshallas stun-chance will hopefully buy some time.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: The best defense is a good offense
« on: June 19, 2013, 09:29:17 PM »
here is some ideal analysis.

battle forge is the equivalent to a mana crystal + a free quick action.
battle forge cost 8
crystal cost 5
so you spend 3 mana to get a free quick action per turn.

lair is equivalent to two mana flowers plus a full action.
lair cost 15 mana
2 flowers cost 10 mana
so you spend 5 mana to get a free FULL action per turn.

so in an ideal case battle forge and lair are similar in there efficiency. but I think I figured out the problem. at the start of the game you will never have enough mana to use 2 full action moves(lair), you will have enough for 2 quick actions (battle forge). perhaps if I changed my mindset to save spawn points for mid-late game where I want there turn advantage more then there mana advantage I could get spawn points to work...... I must go back to excel

Yeah, I did a similar calculation. Also, the mana is committed to creatures. When you have the mana, you don't have the actions and vice versa.

I have been thinking of clerics to the Asyrian temple. The clerics speed op the return and can be swithched to guards, when the enemy comes. So I need to summon more guarding creatures and several because the enemy has a big tempo-advantage. By the time the temple would start to pay off I would be out of creatures to summon.

What we need is an expendable spawnpoint. 5 mana (according to your calculations) for a single-use spawn point and 8 for one with channeling.

Isn't "the problem" with high competition play-style that it is the extremely specialised, unprepared for combination that wins? (I don't play competitively, but I like to read about it).

Extreme specialization is hard to counter, until you are prepared for it, then you can counter it effectively, though it might require dedicating some resources (assuming a more or less balanced game). The annoying thing is, that its hard (impossible?) to counter every extreme build. There is a danger of ending in a rock-paper-scissor situation where it is just a matter of luck whether your opponents fit the thesis or the anti-thesis (so to speak) to your build.

So, while I admire strong combos to a certain degree, I think over-specialization is a problem.

Currently the Priestess is my favorite, but I would hate a one-trick build. I like the way that I know I can build an unstoppable army, given enough time, but also know that I can be rushed to death and therefore have to try to change to a faster, but also more fallible playstyle. So I worry about something like: What if my enemy is a BM that casts Grizzly in the first turn, moves 2+Bitter Fox in the second, and Wolf+pet+Rouse the Beast in the third? That is 17 attack dice or 20 if Grizzly gets full attack and wolf and BM is in the same position. Having nothing, but temples at this point would be problematic I think.

I don't know how the extreme temple-build plays in detail, but I'm sure there is an answer. I hope strategy will be based on a broad selection of cards.

(and nice comment Wiz-pig, I've had that thought)

Right, my mistake.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Beastmaster
« on: May 13, 2013, 08:45:03 AM »
Elemental Cloak is probably enough fire resistance. I don't really think I need more. That you tell me to add more fire resistance tells me you have trouble with Warlocks.

Wand of Healing allows me to remove status conditions. That's the entire reason I included it in the build. Gorgon Archers can be a real problem without some way to remove status conditions, although a BM cares less than a Warlock because of how strong the BM's swarm options are.

I have a few big option. A Steelclaw Grizzly and a Timber Wolf Pet is already a pretty strong pair of creatures if I decide to go that route. Against a first turn Idol of Pestilence I'd probably go with a Steelclaw, possibly as a Pet, play the Battleforge, and then decide whether it made more sense to kill the Idol and swarm, or just kill my opponent directly.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that I lack defensive options. I have a ton of creatures, and I can guard with them if necessary. Feral Bobcat is the most efficient small creature in that role, but I can use other creatures for that as necessary, and Steelclaw, Redclaw, and a Timber Wolf Pet make pretty sturdy guards. I can get myself up to 6 armor. I have Regrowth Belt, Agony, and Reverse Attack. I can use my creatures to hinder and Tanglevines to restrain my opponent's creatures as I back off and build up again or kite my opponent if necessary. I can use Teleport, Force Push, Wall of Thorns, and Mongoose Agility as alternative means of escaping from creatures. What exactly would you add that improves a BM's options defensively? Block? I just have no idea what kind of options you're looking for. I look at the list and think I have plenty of options in most regards.

Ahh, didn't know the Wand of Healing.

If elemental cloak (+perhaps nullify) is enough for you I wont argue. It would be my first priority to dissolve/explode as a warlock. It is mostly just me being paranoid since I have only played as Warlock myself, never against one.

But it seems like you got most things covered. I will show it to my swarm-crazy friend.

Spells / Re: Clerics and swarm-guarding
« on: May 13, 2013, 07:34:58 AM »
Let me clarify.

This is only relevant when playing with a Temple of Asyra opening and there sure are other ways to playing Priestess, especially if you want a quicker game.

That being said, it is a "guard-swarm", so its not meant for attack. Cleric vs. Bitterwood fox is an equal fight if you do the numbers. Having 5 clerics (25 mana) will give you 30 hitpoints of guards, two Knights of Westlock (26 mana) is only 20 hit points and are easier to focus fire (yes, they have armor and defense which is powerful, but both can be mitigated). If a knight dies you will lose tempo, if a cleric dies, it is not a big deal. One guard can be controlled, three guards is a bit more tricky. The clerics actually have the same number of attack dice as the two knights although it counts as less against armor. The trick is to keep the damage spread out, using other clerics to heal the damaged ones if able and generate mana when possible.

The whole point would be an alternative way to turtle-up untill you gain tempo. Once the clerics are out (around turn 3-4) you start summoning archers and angels (assuming you have your temples out). With 12-14 mana/turn you can summon one every turn and still have a bit to spare. Or you could cast Valshalla and watch her power up as the clerics die (because they eventually will). If your opponent instead focus on the new threat,  your clerics become a free minor heal/turn.

This is of course speculation, but looking at the cleric I can only see them being good in larger numbers.

Spells / Clerics and swarm-guarding
« on: May 12, 2013, 09:27:36 PM »
I have so far thought the cleric to be pretty useless, but now I looked at it again rethinking my opinion.

The cleric can generate mana at the Temple of Asyra which is prette cool, but it is an early game move and the Priestess is often vulnerable in early game. It has a pretty useless heal of one die. It is pretty tough for a cheap creature, but has only a weak attack. So it can do different things, but non of them well.

Except in numbers...
Many clerics together might be strong force. With 5 clerics you have a minor heal per round. They can take turns at guarding and healing up and producing mana at the temple. With a Sacred Ground in their zone, they will be quite durable and almost impossible to one-shot. Later in the game, they become a portable minor heal or an alternative swarm.

It is a strategy that should be played early in combination with Temple of Asyra, once you have 4+ clerics (two turns) you can start doing other thing. Temple of Asyra+Harmonize+clerics will get you 14 mana a turn, which is pretty solid for building the counter-offensive.

It is not strategy that can be used against everything and using it in many situations will be fatal (aganist mana drain or AoE-heavie fast-moving Warlock), but I think I might finally have found a use for the cleric.

Good tips Koz!

But wouldn't it be more effective not to rush, while your opponent spends his actions on moving?

I am thinking Turn 1 - Temple of Light, Turn 2 - Samadriel, Turn 3 - Staff of Asyra+fight. That way you get around the problem with your angel getting beat that piousflea mentioned. I am not sure I would stay in the corner or move one up to get the temple to a better position, that would depend.

I am also looking at knockdown-spam in these mage+big vs mage+big situations. Perhaps Knockdown+Hand in turn 3 instead of Staff if your opponents creature hasn't acted?

It is an interesting subject and more ideas would be welcome.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Beastmaster
« on: May 12, 2013, 07:26:37 PM »
Looks like a good strong build.

It seems like you plan to be on the offensive. Personally I would worry a bit more about my defenses, because if the opponent wins the tempo race in early game your response options seem limited.

I am a bit paranoid about Gorgons weak condition and include a Purify in most builds where I might become dependent on a strong creature like the Grizzly.

As mentioned, I would also consider a bit more fire-protection.

Finally (and no surprise to you  :) ), I would include a big creature or two, so that it is possible to switch to a "Few Big" strategy if the opponent has a strong anti-swarm plan.

I want to try a Gray Angel rush against a BM with Lair tactic at some point, it should be pretty annoying for the BM, though I can't say if its effective. But I include a Circle of Lightning and an Orb of Suppression with my Priestess as a more "standard" answer to swarm.

Still being rather inexperienced at the game I find this to be the main difficulty. I prefer having having a slow and a fast strategy for most builds, a response for aggro and some utility. That makes for some hard choices.

For the OP. Here is a  suggestion, don't know if it works.
EDIT: I mixed up two threads, this was a comment for sIkE against Warlock Beatdown.

Knight, Temple of Light, Knight, Staff of Asyra+Dragonscale Hauberk.
By turn 4, you will have a total of 15 attack dice, 2 chances to cause Daze/stun, some armor and fireresistance. And you will have used mainly basic Priestess spells.

But like I said, I have no idea if it will work.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: A simple Beastmaster
« on: May 02, 2013, 09:09:09 AM »
True, but I would not be passive while you chose how to deal with my defenses. The "guarding" creatures could focus-fire your attackers just as well. Flying might be a problem, but that is why I include Maim Wings, knockdown and such. You have spend mana or actions getting to me quickly while I have been building, that gives me a small advantages. And I only need to be guarding with one creature since you probably only have one or two creatures besides your mage.

You are right that its not a question about offense and defense. I was just discovering the flexibility of BM creatures. A conjuration might be defensive but usually cannot be turned into an offense. A Gorgon might also be a powerful defense, but will be lacking if you suddenly need to go on the offensive (unless you have prepared for this). Similarly, most aggro-openings cannot be turned into effective defense if the tide turns. If you make a big investment in the first turns, into offense, defense, spawnpoint, or something else, that investment will make you vulnerable if it doesn't pay off later and the opponent can (and should) play to keep this from happening. But BM investment in creatures is flexible enough that it doesn't leave him vulnerable to any particular move. In 3 turns he can have a powerful force that can be used as offense or defense depending on the situation.

This is perhaps trivial, but I still find it interesting from a generalist vs specialist perspective. I dislike having builds that are very vulnerable against one type of strategy.

Pages: [1] 2